Andrew Filev, Friday, 15 August, 2008

Interview with Project Shrink

Category: Social Project Management , Project Management 2.0
Tags: discussions, emergence, inverviews

I was interviewed by Bas de Bar recently. Bas has a great blog called Project Shrink. It is a valuable source of tips, ideas and other important information for project managers. Bas is also the author of "Surprise! Now You're a Software Project Manager." Those of you who are in software development might want to have a look at it.

We had a conversation about the nature of Project Management 2.0, emergent structures, collective intelligence, project management software and my work on Wrike. It was a pretty long dialog, so Bas decided to publish it in parts. I will be glad to get your feedback on what I said there.

Read full article >

Comments (1)

Andrew Filev, Wednesday, 30 April, 2008

Social Project Management: Another Point of View

Category: Social Project Management , Collective Intelligence , Project Management 2.0
Tags: emergent structures, emergence

Hundreds of people are already looking forward to this year’s Enterprise 2.0 conference. One of the most interesting sessions during this conference last year was one by Leisa Reichelt. Leisa is interested in the changes going on in project management and she calls these changes Social Project Management or Project Management 2.0. At Enterprise 2.0 Conference 2007, she gave a presentation on Social Project Management, where she pointed out several distinctive features of the new wave in the project management discipline. According to Leisa, they are: small teams, motivated people, limited planning, minimal scope, small projects, rapid release, responsiveness, and iterations. Leisa noted that the essential point of her presentation was that “there are other ways to manage projects than ye olde fashioned waterfall methodology.” According to her, these ways emerge in project management due to the penetration of social software into in the enterprise.

Read full article >

Comments (4)

Andrew Filev, Wednesday, 23 April, 2008

How can collaboration and emergent structures do the routine job for you?

Category: Social Project Management , Collaboration , Project Management 2.0
Tags: emergent structures, emergence, many-to-many, planning

In my previous post I wrote on gaps in efficiency of traditional project management tools. The major problem with these tools is that they are not flexible and that they do not leverage collaboration. These tools created lots of additional routine operations the project manager should perform. Many of these operations are connected with project planning and updating project plans.

Read full article >

Comments (2)

Andrew Filev, Wednesday, 05 March, 2008

Looking forward to MLab Roundtable on Evolution of Management Innovation

Category: Social Project Management , Project Management 2.0
Tags: events, emergence, dicussions

I was invited to join the MLab / McKinsey Tech Roundtable on the 7th of March in San Francisco. It’s an event organized by Management Innovation Lab, a non-profit research organization based in Palo Alto and London, focused on corporate experimentation of management innovations. I’m really looking forward to meeting the other participants of the roundtable and discussing questions about accelerating the evolution of management practices with them. I’m especially excited to participate in a discussion with recognized innovation thought leaders, Andrew McAfee, Gary Hamel and Lenny Mendonca.

Read full article >

Comments (0)

Andrew Filev, Thursday, 07 February, 2008

Top-down and Bottom-up Project Management: Leveraging the Advantages of the Two Approaches

Category: Social Project Management , Collaboration , Collective Intelligence , Project Management 2.0
Tags: emergent structures, emergence, project management software, bottom-up management

Top-down and Bottom-up Project Management: Leveraging the Advantages of the Two Approaches
Significant changes are taking place in management and especially project management today. We hear that organizations, like the New York Times, Tribune Co., Ernst & Young switched from the so-called top-down management style to bottom-up management. Others, including some of the world’s biggest corporations, such as Toyota and IBM, implemented bottom-up management style elements in some of their departments. The popularity of the bottom-up approach to management is growing. In spite of this fact, the discussions about the two major approaches are still hot. Why have organizations become so anxious about changing their management style? If we compare the two management approaches, the answer to this question will be clear.

Read full article >

Comments (0)

Andrew Filev, Tuesday, 15 January, 2008